Iran International
For the first time in nearly two weeks, Iran passed two nights without new US strikes, creating the first real pause in a campaign that appears to have evolved well beyond protecting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
Analysts increasingly see a broader effort to erode Tehran's military, economic and political capacity until negotiations become the less costly option.
President Donald Trump has oscillated between threatening "massive attacks" and calling for renewed negotiations with Tehran. According to Axios, he decided against another round of strikes on Friday despite military plans being ready to execute.
Whether the lull marks the beginning of diplomacy or merely an operational pause remains unclear. What appears more significant is how the campaign itself has evolved.
Military analyst and retired US Army officer John Spencer believes Washington's objectives now extend well beyond degrading Iran's immediate military capabilities.
Rather than seeking immediate regime change, he argues, the campaign is designed to convince Tehran's leadership that continuing the conflict will steadily erode its ability to govern, project military power and preserve the strategic leverage it has spent decades building, ultimately forcing Iran to negotiate from a position of growing weakness.
"The United States could do a lot more," Spencer told Eye for Iran. "This is about changing the regime's behavior."
The evolution is visible in the targets themselves. Early strikes focused overwhelmingly on Iran's ability to threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, hitting coastal radar installations, anti-ship missile batteries, drone facilities and command-and-control centres.
More recently, however, the campaign has shifted inland toward bridges, railways, communications infrastructure and military logistics networks, particularly around Bandar Abbas.
Iran's largest commercial port and a key naval hub overlooking the Strait of Hormuz, Bandar Abbas has become increasingly isolated as transportation links and logistics infrastructure come under repeated attack.
For Spencer, that shift reflects an effort not simply to destroy weapons but to restrict Iran's ability to move forces, sustain military operations and eventually rebuild damaged capabilities.
"It could be beyond the battle of Hormuz," Spencer said. "It could be setting the conditions for future operations."
He argues the United States still retains considerable military, economic and cyber capabilities that have yet to be fully employed should Washington decide to intensify pressure further.
Regional balance shifts
Former Kuwaiti Information Minister Saad bin Tefla Al Ajmi believes the campaign has also altered Iran's wider strategic position.
He argues Tehran's regional network has suffered setbacks on multiple fronts. Hezbollah has been severely weakened, Syria no longer provides the strategic corridor it once did following Bashar al-Assad's fall, and repeated attacks have degraded Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
"Iran is now between two choices," Al Ajmi said. "The chalice of poison or suicide."
He also questioned whether Iran's increasingly fragmented decision-making structure could complicate any future negotiations.
"There is a fragmentation in the leadership in Iran now," he said. "Sometimes we have a problem of who to communicate with."
Military pressure has also coincided with a tightening domestic crackdown, with human rights groups reporting an increase in executions of protesters and political prisoners during the conflict.
Whether the two-night pause marks the beginning of diplomacy or simply the interval before another wave of strikes remains uncertain.
What the past fortnight has already revealed, however, is that Washington's objectives now appear to extend far beyond the Strait of Hormuz, towards reshaping the military and political calculations of Iran's leadership itself.
The report said Iran's nuclear infrastructure had already been heavily damaged by Israeli strikes and the US "Midnight Hammer" operation against its main enrichment sites, but that several facilities could still be considered targets.
"It appears that the bulk of the sites that were needed to make nuclear weapons have been hit," David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security and a former UN weapons inspector, told the newspaper.
"But Israel may know of new sites through intelligence, and there may be reason to strike old sites that are being rebuilt," he said.
Pickaxe Mountain seen as top target
The Journal said Pickaxe Mountain, known in Iran as Mount Kolang, remains the most likely target because Israeli intelligence believes Iran moved thousands of uranium-enrichment centrifuges into tunnels there after last year's 12-day war.
According to the report, the underground complex lies hundreds of feet beneath granite, making it difficult to destroy even with US bunker-busting bombs. Experts cited by the newspaper said Washington could instead strike tunnel entrances or other access points.
"Washington's clearest nonproliferation wins against Iran in the war were stopping all uranium enrichment at declared facilities and entombing enriched uranium stockpiles," Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told the Journal.
"The more time elapses, however, the more crucial Pickaxe mountain appears to Iran's reconstitution effort," he said.
Other facilities could also be struck
The Journal said other potential targets include the Taleghan 2 facility at the Parchin military complex, which satellite imagery suggests Iran has been rebuilding, although experts differ over how much of the site survived previous Israeli strikes.
It also identified support facilities at Fordow, where above-ground buildings housing centrifuges and isotope-production equipment remain, as well as parts of the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, where satellite imagery has shown continued vehicle activity despite previous US missile strikes.
The report added that remaining buildings at Iran's Natanz uranium enrichment plant could also be targeted if Washington expands its air campaign.
The newspaper said the operation was centered on Unit 700, a logistics and smuggling arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds Force that Britain sanctioned in 2024 for facilitating activities intended to destabilize the UK and other countries.
According to the report, an Iranian official described Britain's support for US military operations against Iran as making it a target, telling the newspaper: "Our armed forces' message was very clear yesterday - stay away from the carnage."
The official also said: "At the moment we have people right there in London ... They wait for us to tell them what to do," adding that Tehran could "easily make London unsafe" and that "we do not need a missile to target London. It's easier than that."
A second unnamed Iranian official went further, saying Iran had people in Britain who could "even target their prime minister's house" if Tehran chose to do so, according to the newspaper.
Smuggling network
The Telegraph said two people smugglers familiar with routes into Europe told the newspaper that parts of the network were controlled by the Iranian government.
One smuggler was quoted as saying that "some legs of the network" used to move migrants into Europe "are actually owned by the government," while another said controlling a route meant "you can do what you like."
The report said the routes, originally established to move weapons, money and supplies to Iran-backed groups in the Middle East, were also being used to move migrants into Europe, including Britain.
Security experts skeptical
The newspaper said British security experts questioned whether Iran had the capability to establish long-term covert networks in Britain.
It quoted Lynette Nusbacher, a former senior adviser to the Cabinet Office on security matters, as saying Iran lacked the "strategic patience" to plant genuine covert agents in Britain, while Kristian Gustafson of Brunel University said Tehran's objective could instead be to create enough fear to weaken British support for US operations.
